Dr. Francis A. Schaeffer
[30 January 1912 - 15 May 1984]
Picture taken from the February 1973 issue
of One in Christ, the Bulletin of the National Presbyterian
and Reformed Fellowship.

by Francis A. Schaeffer

[The Presbyterian Journal, 6 March 1974, pages
7-8]

Shortly after the formation of the Presbyterian Church
in America, on 4 December 1973, Dr. Francis A. Schaeffer composed
the following thoughts in observance of that event. Notable in his
mind was the contrast between the divisions of the 1930's and the
1970's and the manner in which each of these divisions had been conducted.

[Note that the "National Presbyterian
Church" to which Dr. Schaeffer refers was the original name of
what is now the Presbyterian Church in America, the name having been
changed a year later to avoid conflict with another body.]

The formation of the National Presbyterian
Church is a step forward in the Lord's work in our chaotic age!

As a life-long Presbyterian and now a minister
of the Reformed Presbyterian Church Evangelical Synod, I have had
a deep interest in the Presbyterian Church US since my days at Hampden-Sydney
College in Virginia, from which I graduated in 1935.

Even at that time it was evident that Union
Theological Seminary in Richmond, Va., was a source of liberalism
in the pulpits of the PCUS. Through the years I have seen no sign
that the situation is improving.

To me, practicing the principle of the purity
of the visible Church is a part of the command of the word of God.
In the PCUS, good men have tried unsuccessfully to practice this
principle by combating clearly false teachings at the center of
Christian truth. These include the older rationalistic liberalism
and the new neo-orthodox, existential liberalism. After having failed
to bring purity into the Church, they chose the only way to be obedient--they
practiced the principle in reverse and withdrew.

Thirty-eight years ago such a division occurred
in the Northern Presbyterian Church. Those in the Presbyterian Church
US have showed more than long patience in their efforts to bring
improvements in their Church from within. However, the formation
of the National Presbyterian Church should not be seen as the ending
but a beginning.

It would be tragic if the National Presbyterian
Church made the same mistakes which were made in the Presbyterian
Church in the North. True brethren who have not felt led by the
Lord to leave the PCUS should be treated with dignity and a loving
beauty. There are two reasons for this:

Observable Love

First, Jesus taught that the mark of the
Christian is the observable love shown among all true believers.
Second, by keeping the lines open to these men--not as a stratagem
but as loving obedience to Christ's commands--the National Presbyterian
Church will continue to offer a viable alternative. In the days
ahead, the pressures will increase through the further growth of
liberal control and the almost certain coming union with the United
Presbyterian Church USA. I pray that mistakes made years ago in
the North will not be repeated today.

The vision of the National Presbyterian Church
should not end here. We must keep our distinctives as to the Reformed
position, which we believe are true to the Scripture, and it should
be natural to have close contacts with other true Presbyterian bodies.
The chasm should not be at the point of our distinctives; it should
be between Bible-believing Christians and those who have given up
loyalty to the Scripture.

Two things are happening simultaneously now:
The first is a resurgency for Christian truth. Going back to the
1930's in the United States, the larger historic denominations were
largely lost to the liberals, but three were not: The Lutheran Church-Missiouri
Synod, the Christian Reformed Church, and the Southern Baptists.
Thirty-five years later, these three denominations are now grappling
with the same issues, all of which are rooted in the question of
the authority of Scripture.

The Missouri Synod under the leadership of
courageous men seems to have won its battle. The Southern Baptist
Church now finds itself in the same position as the Presbyterian
Church US in the 1930's. That is, the churchmen are largely faithful,
but the seminaries are infiltrated with liberalism.

One may hope and pray that the Baptists will
stir themselves before it is too late. If the Baptists practice
the principle of the purity of the visible Church in the direction
the Missouri Synod has gone, then they may not have to travel the
unhappy route of withdrawal as had to be done in the Southern Presbyterian
Church.

Doors and Bridges

The National Presbyterian Church stands at
a place of significance if the doors are kept open on one side to
the true believers in the Presbyterian Church, and bridges are built
toward those struggling for the same cause in other groups. However,
at this time the question is not the formation merely of an organization;
it is the establishment of a true Church.

The failure of those who separated from the
Presbyterian Church USA during the 1930's extended beyond the loss
of contact with those true Christians who stayed in the Church;
it extended to the attempted organizational expression. The International
Council of Christian Churches gave such hope in its beginning, failed
because of its harshness; it did not express or practice that mark
of the Christian, the observable love among all true Christians.

There the question now is whether 35 years
are enough to expunge this mistake so that another organization
is viable at this time. The leaders in the National Presbyterian
Church should consciously try to establish contacts with those who
are true to the Scripture and committed to the practice of the purity
of the visible Church in whatever groups they may be. Certainly
groups in other countries would be interested in such contacts.

The second important occurrence now is the
obverse, unhappy side of the first. At the same time we take heart
from the formation of the National Presbyterian Church and events
in the Lutheran Church-Missiouri Synod, we recognize a most distressing
trend is developing: In much of evangelicalism regard for Scripture
is weakening.

It is my observation that ecclesiastical
latitudinarianism leads to cooperative latitudinarianism, and this
tends to lead to doctrinal deviation, especially in regard to Scripture.

For example, think of the change at Fuller
Theological Seminary. In a paper read at Wheaton College a few years
ago, Professor Daniel Fuller defined "non-revelational matters"
in the Scripture as those which are "capable of being checked
out by human investigation, that is, knowable by what eye can see
and ear can hear." He added that the Bible contains "the
non-revelational areas of science and history."

This kind of thinking is not limited to one
seminary. The battleground on the modern scene is whether the Bible
is completely authoritative where it touches history and the cosmos,
or only where it touches religious matters. It is difficult to see
any basic difference between this and neo-orthodox existential theology.

The divergence in evangelical groups centers
especially in the first half of Genesis, which is often considered
to be parable rather than space-time history. The weakening among
evangelicals is not limited to the United States; it is present
in other parts of the world as well.

In England, preference tends to be given
for general revelation over special revelation, so that science
has the last voice. This is different in expression, but not in
position, from that being developed theologically by Professor Fuller
and those in the United States who are one with him.

If Christ does not come back within the next
few years, I could visualize the possibility of a new alignment.
Those standing for the total authority of all Scripture and for
the principle of the practice of the purity of the visible Church
would draw together and away from relativism, which surrounds us
in the total culture and which has infiltrated the Church.

In such a setting, the National Presbyterian
Church may in God's providence be a central factor if it exhibits
and practices God's holiness in life and doctrine, and simultaneously
exhibits and practices God's love toward all true Christians in
whatever groups they are.

I am thankful for the formation of the National
Presbyterian Church and I pray no small or provincial vision for
it.